that might be just a little mistake, but I was wondering if it actually impacted the combat resolution when the Flammpanzer II were involved...

jaw -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/1/2013 9:35:44 PM)

You are looking at the stats for the Flammpanzer II's machine gun. The flamethowers (it has two of them so actually twice the firepower of the Flammpanzer III or Flammpanzer 38(t)) are listed below the machine gun.

As for the 100 versus armor rating, the assumption is if can actually get close enough to a tank to spray it with a flamethrower you will knock it out. Given the armor rating of the Flammpanzer II that won't be easy.

Paul McNeely -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/2/2013 8:43:17 AM)

Actually I don't think I've ever seen german flamethrowers (neither tanks nor engineers) actually get used in combat. Same goes with sachel charges on either side, nor have I seen Finn troops hurling moletov cotails. I have seen russian flamethrowers at work. At least several patches back they were the only thing that killed german tanks since then things have improved (or gotten worse depending on your view). Gernades are also not used by either side. Oddly enough SMGs are used during middle range engagements where you would expect them not to be used, makes highly experienced russian SMG squads considerably more dangerous then you might think.

Anyone actually seen gernades, molotov cotails or sachel charges used by units?

randallw -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/5/2013 7:59:51 AM)

I ran a battle at fairly high detail ( level 5 or 6 for much of it ); the combat closed down to 50 yards a few times then the Axis division retreated. The short range stuff ( satchels, grenades, etc ) didn't get to be used.

Paul McNeely -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/6/2013 7:41:38 AM)

I've never seen the sachel charges/gernades get used in hundreds of battles at high detail, but I've also never seen german flamethrowers fire, while it is routine for the russian ones to do so. For a while they were the only thing that was destroying german tanks.

randallw -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/6/2013 8:30:06 AM)

Sounds like a bug.

I checked the equipment database and flamethrowers are treated as a generic model, with Soviet stats being the same as the German ones, with a range of 50 ( so they should be firing? ).

Paul McNeely -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/6/2013 3:41:31 PM)

I would think so as well...but I've yet to see them fire ever. Every pioneer squad has them so I should have seen them from time to time but never. Not when playing the soviets or the germans. I have never seen an axis side flamethrower in operation while the soviet ones show up in any halfway decently organized defence.

The same is true for all sides with respect to handgernades (though I see rifle gernades regularily), sachel charges or molitov cotails.

JeremyB -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/7/2013 9:27:03 AM)

Same for me

checked it a number of times in highest detail combat report mode, but never saw them in action

jaw -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/7/2013 12:56:37 PM)

I spoke to Gary and all weapons are supposed to fire if within range. One other thing that might be accounting for not seeing them fire is their low ROF. Have you ever seen Panzerfausts and Panzerschrecks being used? These weapons also have very low ROFs.

Paul McNeely -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/7/2013 3:06:47 PM)

None of my games are advanced enough to see if PzF of PzSch have been used. One thing I find very odd is that SMGs fire at what I would consider the middle range band in combats. This seems very odd to me, but as soviet units get more experienced you start seeing the SMGs firing at two distinct points in the combat. It seems odd to see SMGs with shorter range firing rather than the longer ranged rifles. I'm pretty sure I see the same behavior from German SMGs as well. I don't know the absolute range, and I do know it is a reflection of higher morale/experience but it seems very odd that the russian SMGs are firing when they do.

Also please understand I watch all battles at high resolution (5 I think) and so I have seen several hundred battles and this includes battles where the defenders held and the whole kit and kabodle gets thrown at them and even so no gernades, no sachel charges. I see rifle gernades routinely but no hand gernades.

jaw -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/8/2013 1:25:18 PM)

Your observations seem to be supporting an ROF issue. SMGs naturally have a much higher ROF than rifles so that may be the reason you're seeing them fire and not rifles.

Paul McNeely -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/10/2013 9:14:20 PM)

Ok happy to help out. It is just that the SMGs range is short so I would not have expected to see them firing when I do. It is one of the things that probably accounts for increased axis losses starting in 42. Highter numbers of SMG armed squads plus also higher experience results in more units damaged/destroyed by the SMG squads that are firing twice in the combat.

But this seems distinct from the axis flamethrowers never firing at all. The soviet ones aren't all that common but they do show up in the better organized defences.

Just to add something to this. When my friend and were playing with the latest non-beta release (...19) we observed one other thing. Armoured cars appear to have like magnets in them because when artillary fires in the opening stage of a battle it always hits ACs. We were commenting that the Heer must have an award for the most BA10, BA20 and BA64s destroyed by artillary...and it turns out the Commies have a simmilar thing. It is astounding to see 150 mm Guns shooting at BA10s...or 152 Gun/howitzers bombarding Sdkfz 221s. This seems to be a highly skewed targeting priority I'd say. If nothing else it generates good jokes.

"New secret weapon for your BA10 comrade...you must turn on this switch before going to battle to use it." "All right comrade! What does this weapon do?" "Is secret comrade, you will find out when you use it...expect big surprise!"

jaw -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/11/2013 1:08:18 PM)

Do you know the time frame when you see the Soviet flamethrowers? I ask this because the Soviets receive Flamethrower Battalions in the later half of the War consisting of flamethower squads equipped entirely with flamethowers (i.e. 10 flamethowers in a single squad, 240 in a battalion). If the only thing you have to shoot is a flamethrower and you have 10 of them it's likely they are going to show up in combat.

As for the armored cars suffering excessive casualties, despite attempts to mitigate this problem in the code the general tendency in the game system is for the lightest armor to die first which means armored cars take it on the chin in every combat.

Paul McNeely -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/11/2013 1:45:48 PM)

The time frame is early war (1941-42) where there are no flame thrower battalions. Basically the russian flamethrowers show up most often in a higher entrenchment level defence or in a fortified region defence. They show up I would say about every 3rd or 4th normal battle as well...but against a higher fortification level or the fortified zone they are nearly guarenteed to show up.

When I was starting playing (way back when the game came out) the russian flamethrowers caused essentially 100% of the german tank kills. So the russian's have always been using flamethrowers. From what I can tell they are functioning normally (especially since I only see the hits rather than all the attempts).

gamer78 -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/13/2013 2:17:48 PM)

SMG has 3 times range value vs rifle squad. I wonder if SMG fire in mid range combat as well as short range ?

jaw -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/14/2013 1:10:14 PM)

Don't you have that backwards? All SMGs have a range of 150 yards versus 500 yards for rifles. In game terms a rifle has 5 times the accuracy of a SMG and (assuming you're using the lastest files) 3 times the killing effect per round fired.

I believe the problem lies in the combination of higher ROF for SMGs and the sheer number of them in Soviet units.

gamer78 -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/14/2013 10:44:31 PM)

My mistake. I was talking about 7.92 mg34 equipment. I think it has higher ROF and range than kar rifle. But for SMG squads yes it has lower range. Has also high ROF and very populated in Soviet corps,divisions in ex 1944 setup if we are in same "latest files". Germany produce them in 1943 and Soviet start from 1941. Anyway whatever solution is I hope it can be done within few tweaks,if that's the main problem for late combat calculation.[:)]

Paul McNeely -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/15/2013 7:58:36 AM)

One other thing that may be worth looking into is the rockets (such as Katashukas or Nebelwerfers). I'm rather amazed how ineffective they are at inflicting casualties (it may well be they are inflicting significant disruption of sub-units and I don't see that). They fire astoundingly rarely and you don't see much in the way of casualties. Bombs are also strangly in-effective killers when you consider a 50 kg bomb dropped by a night bomber seems to be about as effective as 1000 kg bomb dropped by a level bomber or a stuka. Again they may have disrupted many more sub-units but in terms of casualties the bigger weapons don't seem to deliever the umm-pah-pah you would expect.

This may well be related to ROF issues.

randallw -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/15/2013 9:47:36 AM)

On the few occasions I produced rocket units the weapons often have a low accuracy rating.

jaw -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/15/2013 12:56:22 PM)

We're looking at the issue of improving artillery effectiveness in WitW but I can't say if any changes would migrate over to WitE before we've moved on to WitE 2.0. As it currently stands artillery primarily causes disruption rather than direct casualties.

Paul McNeely -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/15/2013 3:42:14 PM)

Can I just say that in WitP AE, for a while, artillery was "A WW1 Artillery General's Wet Dream." Please avoid a swing in this direction. I'm glad there is still interest in updating the combat engine of the game with the team.

turtlefang -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/15/2013 3:56:47 PM)

I've run hundreds if not thousands of battles in the editors to watch how the damage gets inflicted. Based on those observations, it appears that actual kills, in order, seem to be:

1) SMGs if in large numbers 2) MGs - these actually do well all through the war 3) Rifles 4) Mortars, medium and 120mm

Experience level also impacts kill rates. As the experience level increases, the kill rates go up, but kills seem to increase at a faster rate than the experience level - so more experienced troops kill a lot more of the enemy.

After that, it depends. If you have a lot of vehicles, then AT guns - either mobile or fixed - seem to get a lot of vehicle kills/damaged.

Aircraft and artillery don't score a lot of kills. They can have a lot of impact on battles but it seems a hit or miss affair. And its by some sort of "interdiction/disruption/demoralization" effect - take your pick. If a unit gets hit by the artillery, something happens that causes it to participate less in combat.

I haven't seen grenades, FTs, PSK cause damage. But it maybe because they cause either so little damage or so infrequent that I just didn't notice it. I was looking for more of the "big" trends.

Post Combat Losses

The primary driver on post combat losses seems to be:

1) how big did you win 2) morale 3) motorized vs non-motorized (or mech) 4) terrain 5) who has the best air support (meaning GAS) 6) how many vehicles does the retreating unit have to haul stuff away

These aren't listed in any particular order. And they are all relative to each combat - with the exception of Mot vs Non-Mot. Here, if you win in a decent manner, you seem seem likely to inflict at least three times+ more losses in the retreat.

And morale a BIG one. The lower a units morale, the more likely it will shatter or suffer major losses. Anything under 40 is in big trouble losing a combat. Anything under 50 could be in trouble. 60 and above is likely to suffer relatively small losses and retreat only. And low morale will inflate combat losses by a huge amount. If you want to bleed somebody, hit the low morale units and really inflict big losses - not in direct combat but in the post combat retreat.

Paul McNeely -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/16/2013 7:33:16 AM)

Yes the damage done in retreat is a major component of the losses you see if you don't watch the battle. It was why I always felt the 2:1 rule for the russian's was acceptable. The russian's suffer extreme losses in a battle during the fight itself, if they fail to win it can be murderous.

Mortars are the biggest killers in the game. 120 mm mortars will fire 3 times, 82 mm mortars will fire 2 times and 50 mm mortars fire once in terms of range. Once the russians start getting large numbers of heavy mortars into their formations losses for the axis mount significantly. Also the mortars have a high rate of fire so the fire at long, medium, and short range by the 120 mm mortars will inflict a lot of damage. The substantial change in combat losses you see starting in early 42 is almost assuredly due to the 120 mm mortars showing up in large numbers with the TO&E changes to russian infantry divisions. The SMG squads only add to this...

How much fire you get from a unit is strongly dependent on the units experience. High experience units will inflict significantly more damage than low experience units. If units that could fire in mid range combat do fire (or fire effectively) is a factor of experience. Units will low experience rarely fire rifles, MGs or SMGs in mid range combat. High experience units put down a signficant amount of fire there. Another reason for higher losses starting in 42, the russian units in 41 will almost never fire small arms in the mid range combat (making hasty attacks much less painful for the germans).

AT with experienced crews do well. They equally often seem to fire on everything but AFVs (russian 45 mm AT guns in particular). Anti-tank rifles seem to be far more effective in the game then I've ever heard of them being in real life.

Artillery in the pre-bombardment phase seems to have a large effect (even it it doesn't do much damage), as the biggest difference between a hasty attack and deliberate one is that a hasty attack forgoes the initial artillery duel by the attacker, and reduces fairly significantly their mid range combat. This seems to increase the losses to the attacker due to the lack of suppression.

It should be noted that fortifed zones and regions have a huge impact on combat, artillery fires more often, and fires more accurately. Early war as the russians this can dramatically change your combat results...you may loose but the damage you inflict on the attacker goes up by a significant amount.

Winning and loosing battles for the most part comes down to men, tubes and tanks. CV isn't an issue in the combat itself which seems to be resolved "operationally" or "tactically." Also so far as I can see there is a morale check of some kind in combat. Units will hold, in general, until the attacker inflicts 10% of their starting numbers in casualties at that point the defender will usually bug out. How many casualties you have to inflict to force them out seems to be dependent on the initial morale of the defender, I've almost never seen a defender hold past 20% or once hits on support squads start showing up. But I have seen a unit withdraw the first time it was fired on by a rifle (it was in bad shape). This may be an automatic odds calculation thing as well I don't really know. It just looks like a morale check failure. Defending units are not fired upon by every attacking unit and then odds are calculated unless they hold. If they withdraw/shatter/route/surrender the combat can be terminated before all attacking units have fired. But a unit will stay in place until the short range combat starts.

The post combat retreat is what drives losses that you see in low display value combat results. Attacking a german security Rgt early war with 1 Cav, 1 Tank and 2 Rifle divisions cost me six times the losses I inflicted on the germans in combat, I ended up with equal losses due to the combat losses inflcted in the retreat. My current rule of thumb for a successful russian attack is to have 5x as many men/tubes/tanks as the German. The only thing I use CV for is to tell me how strong the enemy is compared to a full strength unit of that type. When playing the German this is problematic as 1 can mean a great many things, but for the russian the units CV is proportional to their TO&E value.

randallw -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/16/2013 9:27:41 AM)

AT rifles may seem to cause a lot of trouble because the Soviets start deploying them in crazy numbers during 1942.

The Guru -> RE: Flammpanzer II weird stats (2/16/2013 12:46:10 PM)

quote:

Aircraft and artillery don't score a lot of kills.

regarding artillery, that's rather inaccurate historically. Above 50% of German casualties in the East are attributable to Soviet artillery. Soviet losses are around 30%, although the data is less reliable.